NSLP Group Five Elite Wikia
'NSLP Group Five Elite' ENC2210 ''' '''Professor Kate Casey-Sawicki Tiffany Tedford - Haripriya Griesser - Jonathan Fitts The National School Lunch Program (NSLP) ''' '''Introduction The National School Lunch Program provides free or reduced-cost school lunch meals to students in need through subsidies to school districts and states. This program was first authorized by the National School Lunch Act (NSLA) of 1946. Now it "operates in more than 96 000 public and nonprofit private schools and provides low-cost or free lunches meeting nutritional standards to more than 31 million children daily" (Bhatia, Jones, & Reicker). Thousands of low-income families around the nation greatly depend upon this school lunch program to feed their children. Meals served through NSLP must meet rigorous nutritional standards and NSLP research has shown that children who participate in the program have greater nutritional intakes than those who do not. Though the SNAP (Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program) is the largest subsidized low-income nutritional program in the country, commonly known as "food stamps", the NSLP, the second largest subsidized program, has seen variance in its funding through the years. The subsidy increases or decreases are not necessarily politically partisan. During the Republican Nixon administration, the NSLP saw major increases in funding, with Nixon attempting to ensure that all eligible students would receive lunches at no cost. However, by the end of the Carter administration (a Democrat), cuts had been made to the funding of NSLA. Ronald Reagan enacted further cuts as well as implementing new dietary standards that in application allowed condiments such as ketchup to be considered part of the vegetable portion of a nutrition regimen. In 2010 Michelle Obama began the "Let's Move!" campaign, a preemptive government-funded approach to fighting childhood obesity (Confessore). An intrinsic part of this effort was the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act, which sought to add stricter nutritional guidelines to school lunch programs being subsidized by the NSLP. The federal rule titled "National School Lunch Program: Direct Certification Continuous Improvement Plans Required by the Healthy,Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010" was implemented in 2013 by the USDA (USDA, 12221). Though the federal act passed with the subsequent additional requirements, the nutritional standards required by this legislation continue to be a controversial issue in local, state and federal politics. NSLP Controversy Controversy has surrounded the NSLA and the NSLP since the inception of the federal programs. Originally developed as a program to utilize surplus farm and dairy goods in the United States while also supplementing the dietary needs of children in the post-war poverty era, the National Student Lunch Act was enacted in 1946 (Taenzler). Though there are many controversies surrounding the federal guidelines imposed by this Act, two of the most apparent are the stigmas attached to utilizing tax-payer funded programs and the recent decline in reduced-cost lunch distribution and consumption (Blad, 5). While the National School Lunch Act had bi-partisan support in 1946 (Gunderson), currently the program has been under attack after the implementation of Michelle Obama's "Let's Move" campaign and the standards that have been implemented, with bipartisan consent of the the two major political parties, the GOP and the Democrats ((Federal Register). Currently, the vitriolic language regarding this program has been limited to anecdotes from conservative media. Many non-peer reviewed articles are available and the most common language in this discovery is a total lack of scientific evidence and a focus on "school lunch is 'nasty'" (Julian). Though these publications tend to focus on anecdotal references to student's distastes for the current fare available at schools, overall programs have shown much progress in participation since the program's inception. The graph NSLP Distribution displays the contrast between the number of free (blue) versus reduced price (red) versus full price (green) lunches served nationally from 1969 to 2014 (USDA, data). As shown, since the NSLP was initiated, the number of meals served to students receiving free lunch has gradually increased overall, while the number of full price lunches served has decreased, although with more fluctuation. Moreover, the number of meals served to students receiving a reduced price lunch has slightly increased, yet seems to have reached more of a plateau. Furthermore, there is a marked increase noticeable in the number of students receiving free lunch from 1969 to 197, in the early 1990's, and once again from 2008 to 2011. While the initial increase in meals served is most likely attributable to the gradual incorporation of schools to the program, the two major increases in lunches served post 1990, are more likely related to the concurrent economic recessions that occurred at those times. This cause of increase in meals served is not only logical, but also scientifically based. From a logical standpoint, during a recession, the income of an average family will decrease, thereby qualifying more families for participation in their respective school lunch programs. Furthermore, in a study conducted by the US Agricultural Department, it was found that "school lunch participation increased from 28.9 million students on an average day in the 2003-04 school year to 31.8 million in 2010-11, before dropping to 30.3 million in 2013-14" (Blad). The article in Education Week goes on to summarize the US Dept. of Agriculture study, which concluded that when the recession deepened in 2007-08, the number of students receiving free and reduced lunch increased. They also concluded that the shift was due both in part to an increased number of children meeting NSLP criteria and also to more schools adopting community eligibility. In regards to the Healthy Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010, as shown in the graph above and supported by the conclusions of the US Agriculture study, the number of full price meals served and the number of children purchasing them "had been declining for years before the 2012-13 school year," which was when the 2010 act was fully implemented (Blad). As such, this data then supports the idea that, revamped nutrition standards have not contributed as much to NSLP participation as economic factors at relevant times. However, looking at the previous data in a different format provides compelling evidence to the contrary. The graph " Percentage of Free & Reduced Lunches..." displays the number of free and reduced lunches served as a percentage of total lunches (USDA, data). As one can see, the overall trend from 1969 to 2014 is a substantial increase in NSLP participation measured by number of lunches served per year. Taking in conjunction with this graph the article Lunch Lines by Dave Constantin, a 'from the trenches' perspective is illuminated. In his article, Constantin references a study done by Rajiv Bhatia in San Fransisco high schools about the negative social stigma associated with receiving free and reduced lunch. Initial practices for differentiating between paying students and free lunch students in the lunch lines was a blatant and inequitable practice involving students carrying different colored tickets or being in completely segregated lines. This segregation resulted in students feeling, as one child Jeff Kapka put, "it's like wearing a sign that says, 'Hey, I'm poor'" (Constantin, 1). As the article goes on to state, revamping these inequitable and segregated practices in order to remove negative social stigma resulted in increased student participation in their respective school NSLPs. Conclusion Overall, although the NSLP has attracted much criticism of various forms since its conception, data shows a consistent upward trend in student participation in the NSLP. Furthermore, despite policy maker's best efforts at cutting or increasing funding, or changing nutritional standards and other rules, other studies have shown that for the most part non political factors affect NSLP participation to a greater degree. That is, economic factors such as recession and social factors such as income level stigmas have a much larger impact on the number of students that participate in the National School Lunch Program. References Bhatia, Rajiv, Paula Jones, and Zetta Reicker. "Competitive Foods, Discrimination, and Participation in the National School Lunch Program." American Journal of Public Health. American Public Health Association, Aug 2011. Web. 06 Aug. 2015. . Blad, Evie. "Recession Linked to Drop in School Lunch Buying." Education Week. 21 Jan. 2015. Web 09 Aug. 2015 Constantin, Dave. "Lunch Lines: Inequitable Cafeteria Practices Stigmatize Low Income Students." The Education Digest. Mar. 2015. Web 09 Aug. 2015. Food and Nutrition Service, USDA. "National School Lunch Program: Direct Certification Continuous Improvement Plans Required by the Healthy Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010." Federal Register V.78 (No. 36), 22. Feb. 2013. Web 09 Aug. 2015 Gunderson, Craig. "Food Assistance Programs and Child Health." The Future of Children V.25(No.1). Spring 2015. Web 09. Aug. 2015. <http://www.futureofchildren.org> Julian, Liam. "Why School Lunch is Nasty." Policy Review. Oct/Nov. 2010. Web 09 Aug. 2015. Taenzler, Sheila A. "The National School Lunch Program." The University of Pennsylvania Law Review ''V. 119 (No. 2), Dec.'' 1970. Web 09. Aug. 2015. DOI: 3311251